That's again a matter of perspective and philosophy, not wrong or right.

Quote:

I'm in no contest with you over superiority. Where did you get that red herring from?

Maybe my wording was a bit short and direct for your understanding. We obviously have very different standpoints, and you keep on preaching that your view and belief be the only correct one -- this without any backup in terms of superior knowledge.

You might even be wrong with ghosts and extraterrestrials, who knows... .

I'm in no contest with you over superiority. Where did you get that red herring from?

See ya
Steve

It might have something to do with the following quote

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot

Here's the deal.

I've been involved in audio long enough to have worked with some of the people who established the business. I spent countless hours recording and mixing in the studio of the man who is such a legend in Hollywood, he has a sound effect and a Star Trek monster named after him. I assisted the sound mixer and transferred dailies on the very first television program that was recorded 100% digital. I've worked with every possible format from 78rpm acoustic recordings to 15 ips 24 track to 35mm fullcoat mag to a full ProTools workstation. I've operated mag readers, Nagras, moviolas and flatbeds. I was a hifi nut back when sources really DID make a difference... a cassette sounded nothing like an LP which sounded nothing like a R2R. I navigated my way through the tangle of generation loss, and I know how many times you can bounce down comp tracks on 24 track before you start losing quality. If you can get ahold of the masters to the Everest recordings, I have three 35mm mag readers sitting in the back room at my office we can play them on. So I think I know a thing or two about what makes sound sound good.

Here's what I know... Redbook sounds perfect right out of the box. Cables don't matter. Speakers and an amp capable of pushing them DO matter. So does a listening environment that acoustically complements your equipment. Equalize your response to get it as flat as humanly possible. And most of all, keep your focus on the music, because that is the reason we go to all this hassle to achieve great sound.

If that's the lunatic fringe to you, there's nothing I can say to you that would help.

for your understanding. We obviously have very different standpoints, and you keep on preaching that your view and belief be the only correct one -- this without any backup in terms of superior knowledge.

Again, I'm not claiming superior knowledge. I know what I know, and I don't bother to discuss what I don't know. The things I do discuss I back up with supporting arguments based on my experience. Take it or leave it. You're under no obligation to respond, and you're mistaken if you think a competition is going on.

That's again a matter of perspective and philosophy, not wrong or right. ... you keep on preaching that your view and belief be the only correct one -- this without any backup in terms of superior knowledge..

I don't think it's an issue of superior knowledge. The true believers don't care very much about knowledge, because that is a mental construct independent of the senses. But anyone who has seen a magician knows that the senses can deceive us.

Our intellect can also deceive us, but that's when we rely on consensus and rigorous testing. And the consensus of audio professionals outside of the audiophile world is that properly constructed cables that measure alike have no audible differences between them.

Cable marketers can cite all kinds of valid scientific principles in their cable ads, but they NEVER connect these principles to what is known (or unknown!) about human hearing. Principles of cable design used by NASA and in hospital equipment have very little relation to signals within the range of human hearing (even well beyond the range of human hearing!).

I think many people fail to remember that the source or amp plays a role and are possibly going based all on an iPod or another source not up to par???

I'm not so much of a cable believer, if at all, but what I do know is, on the Lisa I have in front of me, when going from basic Radio Shack RCA cables to ALO Au/Ag cables, the difference was audible. Subtle, if not an overstatement, but the difference was definitly noticeable to my ears, and I could blindly point out the differences 5 out of 5 times. My GF however, couldn't differentiate them, but she also doesn't really care, lol.

Then I goto my ipod, from the same basic Radio Shack mini and my custom mini, and I can't tell the difference AT ALL. Same goes for an ALO cryo copper and my Turbo dock. The differences, I couldn't tell sonically and blindly, I couldn't tell them apart...but my wallet could.

And now the reason why I now just buy what looks pretty when it comes to cables. As likely, if the DIYers is taking the effort/time to make it look pretty, it'll sound just the same as the next cable....you're just paying for the aesthetic preference.

I'm not so much of a cable believer, if at all, but what I do know is, on the Lisa I have in front of me, when going from basic Radio Shack RCA cables to ALO Au/Ag cables, the difference was audible.

Two general recommendations for comparing equipment... Always set them up with a preamp to allow you to do direct A/B comparison. You might even need two preamps to be able to adjust the line levels to match. Slight differences in volume can appear to be differences in audio quality, when the quality is actually identical. A/B comparisons are important because the auditory memory of humans is accurate in detecting slight differences only for a few seconds. The more subtle the difference, the shorter the auditory memory.

And the consensus of audio professionals outside of the audiophile world is that properly constructed cables that measure alike have no audible differences between them.
--Chris

since you are soooo into backing up your talk sould you show me the study that pointed to the "consensus of audio professionals outside of the audiophile world that made this claim, was it at an industry gathering that a poll was taken or perhaps the at the water cooler of CBS recording studio... wherever it was I would really love to read this. Or perhaps you have sought out all the audio pros then qualified them to ensure there were not part of the audiophile secrect cabal of cable charlitains?? Do tell

since you are soooo into backing up your talk sould you show me the study that pointed to the "consensus of audio professionals outside of the audiophile world that made this claim

I've worked with a lot of audio studios in the Hollywood area, and I've talked shop with the engineers and fire crew guys. I've never met one who thought cables sounded different. One told me that when he builds studios he buys spindles of regular old copper cabling and "rolls his own" cables to length because it's cheaper that way. Another said that if he was recording the Beatles today and he was short a cable, he would send an intern to Radio Shack to get the cable and he'd use it in line until it wore out without thinking twice about it. He was that confident of the quality of regular old plain vanilla cables.

You're under no obligation to respond, and you're mistaken if you think a competition is going on.

See ya
Steve

He probably feels it's a competition because you always have to get the last word in. Why do you do that? Sometimes you just have to let things go, even if you don't agree with them. There will never be a final word in cables; those that hear a difference enjoy them.